Published Jul 16, 2020
With the sincerest expression, diptych brings different things side by side. When things that are not related to each other and belong to the different environments come side by side, and they converge with each other even a little, they inevitably get into contact, and the communication begins among them. Thereby the principal sphere of association is temporal/spatial association.
Another critical association on diptych occurs in the sphere of discursive form and visual form. The discursive form is the verbal form that can be said and appears as speculation; it is established through words. The visual is the formal form that can be seen and appears as a visual composition; it is established through images. In ongoing culture, pictorial and verbal expression are separated from each other, and a definite line is drawn between the image and the word because the images and the words seen in opposition create two different knowledge and experience. Diptych blurs the definite distinction and makes conceivable the two forms to be set parallel to each other and to be one by mixing.
The diptych is prone to either fragment matching or rhizome[i] matching. Thus, on the one hand, it has the feature of examining the relationship between the piece and the piece, the
piece, and the whole, and on the other hand, it has the feature of associating anything with anything else regardless of whether they have standard features. Therefore, two parts, two existence, two fragments on the diptych; one reproduces and conceptualizes thought by always reformatting itself relative to the other.
It is an organic association that two things -a thought, an object, or a visual, come side by side naturally. However, the resources and possibilities offered by organic associations in production are limited. Because organic associations are based on biological processes that are self-expanding and self-replicating, the fact that the associations have extensive possibilities depends on the maximum utilization of the plural energy of the environment and turning it into a product. Therefore, for the associations to be creative, lively, and productive, they must be in exchange of matter and energy with their environment. This exchange is based on chemical processes. In this process, it reproduces and uses the matter and energy it acquires from its environment until it becomes the most useful. This is the metabolic[ii] association. With the help of other perspectives, the one-sidedness and limitation of the perspective can be corrected, and its deficiencies can be eliminated; it can also be transformed. Thus, the matches on the diptych liberate knowledge. They set it free from domination and monopoly of disciplines and become productive by taking the discipline to an extreme level and increasing the production of meaning and information. Everything given is transformed and recreated. Therefore, diptych becomes a tool in which different perspectives can express themselves freely and proceed into a complex, dynamic, also specific meaning relations.
New energies such as new technologies, software, short-lived new versions of the old ones, electronic toys, changing communication channels, virtual reality, augmented realities, including so on encompassing our living spaces. In this situation of constant change, ongoing ways are ineffectual in speculating on architectural thought and practice, presenting information and meaning, establishing visionary architecture, and developing the vision of architecture. These ways are based on the functionality of the given sources and patterns; they are stable closed structures under the influence of centripetal forces; thus, they are monologic.[iii] Functional transformation is required for these ways to be adaptable to emerging/arising/new architecture. This transformation is based on the possibility of thinking and research in a dynamic, fluid, towards a kind of formation and in motion. The different things that it brings together allow the other to be noticed, mutually reflecting and creating each other, without hindering each other. Under the influence of centrifugal forces, they are dynamic and open structures, hence dialogic.[iv] Dialogic associations are processes of producing meaning and describe the relations between the structures that contain plurality. They describe the specific relations between the environments where different perspectives and views intersect. Therefore, it provides the opportunity to establish an extensive network of relations.
[i] For Deleuze and Guattari. The two principles of 'rhizome&' are connection and heterogeneity: any point of a rhizome can be connected to anything other, and must be. This is very different from the tree or root, which plots a point, fixes an order. A rhizome ceaselessly establishes connections between semiotic chains. Semiotic chains of every nature are connected to very diverse modes of coding that bring into play not only different regimes of signs but also states of things of differing status.
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. London: Continuum. 1980. p.
[ii] In the manifesto, ‘Metabolism: The proposals for new urbanism,' This is a metaphor used by the Metabolist group to emphasize the 'ability to regenerate.' They say, 'We regard human society as a vital process -- a continuous development from atom to the nebula. The reason why we use such a biological word, the metabolism, is that we believe design and technology should be a denotation of human vitality.'
Metabolism: The proposals for new urbanism. Bitjutu Syuppan Sha. 1960.
[iii] For Bakhtin, monologic is about having no presumption of equal-valid consciousnesses' plurality, each with its world.
Bakhtin, M. M. Problems of Dostoevsky's poetics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 1997
[iv] Bakhtin argues that 'Dialogic relationships are constructed not as the whole of a single consciousness, absorbing other consciousnesses as objects into itself, but as a whole formed by the interaction of several consciousnesses, none of which entirely becomes an object for the other.' In this context, according to Bakhtin, dialogy and monology have the opposite meaning. He refers to a polyphonic versus monophonic worldview. He advocates mutual interaction and dialogue between meanings.
Bakhtin, M. M. Problems of Dostoevsky's poetics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 1997.